For many sociologists, teaching continues to stand at the center of
their role. There is not doubt that sociologists have professional
responsibilities in their role as teachers. While issues like
competence and confidentiality have their parallels in teaching, many
of these concepts has been developed to address ethical issues in
research. However, unlike research, relatively little attention has
been paid to ethics of teaching and the teaching role and that
attention has been rather recent (Cahn 1986; AAUP 1987). For example,
while many institutions, professional associations (including the
American Association of University Professors) have addressed teaching
in their codes of ethics, only in 1996, did a group of college and
university teachers propose a general set of ethical standards for the
teaching role. As they note, the intent of ethical principles is
neither to contradict academic freedom nor interfere with personal
liberties; rather, it focuses on how both can be exercised in a
responsible manner (see Murray et al., 1996). Just as sociologists have
an obligation to the profession and those participating in the
researcher (whether collaborators or respondents) regarding the conduct
of research, so too do they have responsibilities to their colleagues,
their students and their institutions regarding their teaching.
While teaching can be narrowly defined as concerns that arise in the
classroom, issues surrounding education, teaching and training
encompass a wide range of activities of sociologists outside the
classroom including mentoring, advising, administration and even the
impact of collegial relationships on the teaching mission. As noted
above, ethics in teaching has been confused with a number of other
issues -- academic freedom, personal choice and good practice. On the
former, some have confused academic freedom, the protection to teach
the "truth" without fear of political, economic or religious
recrimination, with claims that they have a right to teach only
particular courses, to teach in any way they want, to use whatever
practices they want and to establish whatever kind of personal
relationships with student that they deem appropriate. However, just
like research, sociologists in their role as teachers have obligations
to protect those whom they teach from inappropriate behavior. The idea
that "what goes on in my classroom is my business" is neither a
suitable use of the protection of academic freedom nor is it supported
under this Code of Ethics. Similarly, recent debates about the proper
way to teach have caused many in colleges and universities to ask if it
is ethical to continue to teach in "old fashioned" ways when research
and assessment suggests they are ineffective. Here, the Code does not
and cannot dictate which techniques or methods should be used, that is
outside of its scope and lies in debates about "best practices."
Finally, one of the most recent debates has asked about our obligations
to train the next generation of teachers both in method and ethical
practices. Under the mentor model, both ideas of how to teach and what
constituted responsible behavior in the teaching role were implicit.
Some have argued that this is inappropriate and does not parallel our
concerns about ethical practices in research (see, for example,
Pescosolido 1991).
Many of the cases illustrate how the present code deals with these
issues and are designed to address the line between these current
debates and the ethical obligations of sociologists in teaching. They
attempt to show how ethical concerns in teaching may play out in the
classroom and how they extend beyond it.